From Classroom to Circus: Fact vs. Fancy in Hard Times

            Charles Dickens' Hard Times uses Fact vs. Fancy as one of its central themes, reflecting a debate of major concern for Dickens and his peers during their era in Victorian England. For Dickens, Facts were “narrow, dry statistics and definitions... presented as... the only sufficient explanation of the world” [and Fancy] “imaginative play... unhindered by the strictures of reality; feeling, compassion,sentiment” (Sonstroem 520). So why the controversy? A relatively new social philosophy known as Utilitarianism had come into vogue, which promoted efficiency and practicality in all matters. In its application to education, math/science and other logical disciplines were stressed at the expense of more imaginative pursuits such as literature or fine arts. Dickens was very opposed to Utilitarianism in his belief that such pedantry endangered the humanity of children, attempting to transform them into “machines”. Hard Times served as Dickens' vehicle to satirize Utilitarianism; it was a cautionary tale pitting characters who represent Fact or Fancy against each other.

             Fact and Fancy can be seen as antagonistic concepts that compete by means of Dickens' characters who personify them, most notably the Gradgrinds for “Team Fact” and the Jupes for “Team Fancy”. As fathers, Gradgrind and Mr. Jupe could hardly be more different, and the same can be said of their respective daughters, Louisa and Sissy. The Gradgrinds are all business and formality; the Jupes are free spirits.But yet, Mr.Gradgrind and Mr. Jupe, although near-opposites, are both well intentioned parents concerned with the outcomes of their children. As a story set within a Utilitarian dystopia, Hard Times interweaves the two central roles of Mr. Gradgrind/Fact versus Sissy Jupe/Fancy into a parable that demonstrates the perils of a life and education that leave no room for playfulness or imagination.

            As the novel opens, Gradgrind is making the premise clear with his statement “Now, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts”. (Dickens 3). Why does Dickens choose to capitalize the word? It lets the reader know right away that this is an important theme for the novel. Sissy Jupe is first introduced as “Girl number twenty”, and when it's revealed that her name is Sissy she is reprimanded by Gradgrind that “Sissy is not a name... Call yourself Cecilia” (6). Under further interrogation, when she discloses that her father works with horses, she is asked to define a horse, and cannot. Gradgrind then humiliates her by having Bitzer, another student, mechanically recite the facts about a horse. This exchange sets the tone for the numerous skirmishes in the war of Fact vs. Fancy that unfold as the story progresses. What begins in Gradgrind's classroom will end in Sleary's circus...

             Analyzing the three “books” of Hard Times in sequence, one witnesses the gradual but  inevitable fate of Mr. Gradgrind's facts-only approach to life. In a sense, “Sowing”, “Reaping”, and “Garnering” allude to the cultivation of that mindset, and what is eventually harvested. It makes for an interesting analogy: When you consider Gradgrind as the “farmer”, his children become the “crops”. Although meticulously fertilized and pruned, with the goal of optimum growth, this regimen comes up lacking for the earlier plantings (Louisa and Tom Jr.). It takes the invasion of a “weed”, Sissy Jupe, to bring the garden into harmony. An “abandoned” flower that Gradgrind transplants into his own plot,with the aim of bringing her under control, Sissy grows her own way and blossoms to the benefit of all.

            Seen from this light, Book I “Sowing” introduces the methods of Mr. Gradgrind and his like-minded associates for controlling the various invasive species in their vicinity; the Sleary Circus being a prominent example. We find it in the scene where Gradgrind discovers “his children surreptitiously peeping through a hole in the fence at the circus, which has been topographically marginalized on the outskirts of that 'triumph of fact', Coketown” (Andrews 33). Circus performers do not belong in this sterile environment, and must be kept as far out of sight and influence as possible. It is likewise for the “Hands” that work for Mr. Bounderby and other factory owners- the nickname “hands” itself reveals that the work they accomplish with these appendages is the only thing valued of them in Coketown.

            The “all work and no play” ethic has also been applied rigorously to Gradgrind's own offspring. It begins in their childhood, in which toys were absent. Dickens writes that the “little Gradgrinds had cabinets in various departments of science... a little conchological cabinet, and a little metallurgical cabinet... and the specimens were all arranged and labelled” (14). The proper arrangement of all things was crucial to Mr. Gradgrind; he therefore later sees fit to arrange a marriage for Louisa and a career for the junior Tom. They both oblige, and for the shallowest of reasons. The only sentiment involved is Louisa's concern for her brother, as she decides that her marriage to Mr. Bounderby will benefit Tom Jr. in his career at the bank. Derived from such a mechanical and factual outlook, the reader is not likely to be surprised in how these life choices will play out.

            In Book II “Reaping”, both Louisa's marriage and her brother's bank career are soon discovered to be dysfunctional. It is a loveless marriage for Louisa and Mr. Bounderby, and Tom Jr. has developed a gambling addiction that demands more and more money to maintain. The overall atmosphere cast by Dickens in part two is of a very boring and empty calm. But there are dark clouds on the horizon. One of them is James Harthouse, a soulless upper-class gentleman who has come to Coketown for lack of anything better to do, and who becomes intrigued with Louisa through his association with Mr. Bounderby. In the guise of helping her brother with the growing gambling problem, his hidden motive is to woo Louisa. Old Mrs.Sparsit notices this- and imagines Louisa's downward spiral.

            The other portent introduced is the secret arrangement made by Tom Jr. with Stephen Blackpool for the latter to hang out at Bounderby's bank for a few nights in succession. We have already witnessed Blackpool, one of the “Hands”, in a downward spiral of his own, tormented by an estranged alcoholic wife, and recently exiled from Coketown for his position regarding unionization. Stephen represents a bittersweet mixture of Fact and Fancy. The facts of his existence are harsh, as a poor and now also ostracized menial worker. The fancy in his life is Rachael, his friend and co-worker in Coketown. She is the woman that he loves but cannot have. Now set to wander off in search of some better fortune. Blackpool must abandon Rachael and his home, and the prospects do not look promising.

             It is within the final book of Hard Times, “Garnering”, that the characters whom Dickens has painted, in varying hues of Fact and Fancy, get their final showing. But prior to the reveal, it is a good time to judge our author's technique thus far. Charles Dickens has been critiqued extensively since his time, in all manner of themes and contexts; it would be safe to say exhaustively so. For this paper there is no pretense at any expertise, nor a presumption of breaking new ground. But each reader and critic must form their own opinions, “garnering” what they might from those who've done so before.

             There exist some paradoxes in Hard Times, in regard to Fact and Fancy, which have not gone unnoticed by the aforementioned critics. For a particularly esoteric example, consider the following: “This idea of an agreement between reason and feeling seems excluded by Dickens’s strict nineteenth-century division of fact and fancy... because Hard Times seals the value of fancy within a system of rational critique, it seems to thwart the very quality of aesthetic experience that it sets out to promote” (Lupton 153). An interesting opinion, but its fairness and validity (and indeed its meaning) are open to individual interpretation.

            A more accessible paradox can be found in a certain irony other critics find in the actions of the “factual” characters: “The reader first encounters Mr. Gradgrind mentally introducing himself to an imaginary audience... Mr. Bounderby's fantasies... involving his own humble origins... are too numerous to list... And yet these are fact-people, primarily because the first chapters and the characters themselves say so” (Pollatschek 279-80). The perfect follow-up comes from the earlier cited critic David Sonstroem: “We see that the domain of Fancy holds no exclusive rights to Fancy. The basic distinction would seem to be rather that the Sissys and Slearys, in accepting both Fact and Fancy, are able to tell them apart, whereas the no-nonsense Gradgrinds and Bounderbys, in refusing to recognize Fancy, engage in it unawares. Their greatest Fancy is that they do not entertain any (525-6). This is a very astute observation, and it makes one wonder whether Dickens created this irony intentionally or accidentally. Either way, the message is profound, in my opinion. Gradgrind's belief that all aspects of life can be measured and controlled statistically... is a serious flight of fancy.

             Back now, to how the battle of Fact and Fancy ends for its enlisted characters in Hard Times, Book III “Garnering” opens with Louisa back at Stone Lodge, her father's home. Harthouse's attempts to win her away from Mr. Bounderby have failed, but have also shown her the futility of that marriage. Sissy Jupe is there to comfort her, and it is a service she also provides to Stephen Blackpool's friend Rachael, who is distraught over his disappearance since being framed for the bank robbery. It is within Sissy that Dickens embodies the triumph of Fancy over Fact. She has been that sorely needed missing element in the Gradgrind household ever since being taken in there. Even the patriarch has begun to acknowledge her importance, and to question his own utilitarian philosophy. Dickens demonstrates this poignantly in the scene where Gradgrind addresses Bounderby about the troubled marriage. “I doubt whether I have understood Louisa. I doubt whether I have been quite right in the manner of her education... you should allow Louisa to remain here for a visit, and be attended to by Sissy... who understands her, and in whom she trusts” (214-15). It's quite a shift in perspective for the man who originally called Sissy “girl number twenty”.

            Girl number twenty plays an integral part in the remainder of the novel. It is Sissy who takes Rachael on a walk in the countryside, where they at last find Stephen Blackpool in the abandoned mine shaft. Once Stephen is rescued, clears his own name and casts suspicion on the true culprit Tom, she is even compassionate and wise enough to send the latter to her old friend Sleary. This act shows clearly both Sissy's love for, and devotion to, the Gradgrinds. The last favor bestowed is also due to Sissy's past connection with the Sleary Circus, when Sleary contrives a way to rescue Tom Jr. from Bitzer and find him passage overseas. From classroom to circus- Fact and Fancy on quite a journey.                                                                                                                                   

             To reconsider the thesis: does Hard Times stand up to the basic claims of its being “a story set within a Utilitarian dystopia... interweaving Fact and Fancy into a parable that demonstrates the perils of a life that leaves no room for playfulness, imagination, or individual freedom”? Of the first clause, Utilitarian dystopia, there can be little argument. Coketown would fit that description for almost anyone, scholarly or not. Dickens skillfully depicts the fictional town as a bleak, dirty, and desolate place where children are drilled in facts, and the majority of adults lead menial and desperate existences. Even those in positions of power such as Gradgrind or Bounderby see their way of life, and the means that brought them there, begin to crumble.

            Is there “peril in a life without Fancy”? Dickens has certainly attempted to convey that, whether or not the jury of his critics agree in their verdict of how successful he was. Utilitarianism may still exist today, but is certainly not a prevalent issue in our current society. To the contrary, much of the modern Western world seems very centered on the “self”, and not the overall common good. We may now be facing an opposite dilemma: too much Fancy and not enough Fact. America worships celebrity,and flocks to the theaters to watch fantasy on the big screen. Our high school students score very low in science and math. Maybe it's time for a “return of the Gradgrinds”.

            One must remember the times in which Dickens lived when they judge his works. While perhaps a bit melodramatic or heavy-handed at times, and with an epilogue that wraps everything up a shade too conveniently, Hard Times has stood the test of history. Even now, over one hundred and sixty years later, the novel is still taught, studied, discussed, and written about- by professors, students, and critics- across the globe. Fancy that...

                                                         Works Cited

Andrews, Malcolm. Dickens and the Grown-Up Child. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1994. Print.

Dickens, Charles, Jeff Nunokawa, and Gage McWeeny. Charles Dickens' Hard Times. New York:     

            Pearson Longman, 2004. Print.

Lupton, Christina. "Walking on Flowers: the Kantian Aesthetics of 'Hard Times.' " Elh. 70.1 (2003):

             151-169. Print.

Pollatschek, N. "Discard the Word Fancy Altogether!'': Charles Dickens's Defense of Ambiguity in    

            Hard Times." Dickens Quarterly. 30.4 (2013): 278-287. Print.

Sonstroem, David. "Fettered Fancy in 'Hard Times'." Pmla. 84.3 (1969): 520-529. Print.